[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <C7FB77DB.2BC42%scofeldm@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 17:03:23 -0700
From: Scott Feldman <scofeldm@...co.com>
To: Scott Feldman <scofeldm@...co.com>,
"Rose, Gregory V" <gregory.v.rose@...el.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"chrisw@...hat.com" <chrisw@...hat.com>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"Williams, Mitch A" <mitch.a.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH 1/2] Add ndo_set_vf_port_profile
On 4/26/10 4:21 PM, "Scott Feldman" <scofeldm@...co.com> wrote:
>> It seems to me that this:
>>
>> ip link show [ DEVICE ]
>>
>> should at least return the number of VFs so
>> that you can make sure the subsequent usage of this:
>
> Yes, I believe that's there today:
>
> NLA_PUT_U32(skb, IFLA_NUM_VF, dev_num_vf(dev->dev.parent));
>
> The number of VFs is returned in RTM_GETLINK. But, it's only returned if:
>
> if (dev->netdev_ops->ndo_get_vf_config && dev->dev.parent)
>
> For my proposal, I'll need to return IFLA_NUM_VF unconditionally so callers
> can get num VFs.
Hmmm...seems IFLA_NUM_VF assumes a PCI device supporting SR-IOV when it uses
dev_num_vf(). I think a better option would have been to query the device
for the number of VFs, without assuming SR-IOV or even PCI.
I see a ndo_get_num_vf() coming...
-scott
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists